Which statement best describes the Elaboration Likelihood Model's application for less-motivated audiences?

Which statement best describes the Elaboration Likelihood Model's application for less-motivated audiences?

• A. It posits central and peripheral routes; tailor messages with strong arguments for engaged audiences and credible cues for less motivated audiences.
• B. It suggests never tailoring messages for diverse audiences.
• C. It is only applicable to print media.
• D. It implies attitude change is impossible.

Answer: (A)

Understanding how people are persuaded hinges on motivation to process the message. The Elaboration Likelihood Model says there are two routes to attitude change: a central route where listeners carefully evaluate strong arguments, and a peripheral route where they’re swayed by cues unrelated to the argument’s quality (like the speaker’s credibility, attractiveness, or endorsements). For audiences that aren’t motivated to think deeply, persuasion typically occurs via these peripheral cues rather than through strong arguments. So the best description is that the model includes central and peripheral routes and suggests tailoring messages to match the audience: use strong, logical arguments for engaged audiences and rely on credible cues for less motivated ones. This approach reflects how motivation shapes which route dominates. The other options don’t fit: the model does support tailoring based on audience engagement, it applies across media (not just print), and it does not claim that attitude change is impossible.

Understanding how people are persuaded hinges on motivation to process the message. The Elaboration Likelihood Model says there are two routes to attitude change: a central route where listeners carefully evaluate strong arguments, and a peripheral route where they’re swayed by cues unrelated to the argument’s quality (like the speaker’s credibility, attractiveness, or endorsements). For audiences that aren’t motivated to think deeply, persuasion typically occurs via these peripheral cues rather than through strong arguments. So the best description is that the model includes central and peripheral routes and suggests tailoring messages to match the audience: use strong, logical arguments for engaged audiences and rely on credible cues for less motivated ones. This approach reflects how motivation shapes which route dominates. The other options don’t fit: the model does support tailoring based on audience engagement, it applies across media (not just print), and it does not claim that attitude change is impossible.